[DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Rodrigo Silveira <rs...@mozilla.com>]

I can help with testing Firefox OS. I assume I can't do much on the firefox os subtask[1] as a non-committer.

There are a couple of pull requests for Firefox OS that I'd love to see in the release ([2] & [3]). PR [4] would be amazing too, but might need some rework. I'm waiting on cordova-lib to show up in github to migrate a local change from CLI that is related to these others too.

None of this is release blocking though.

Rodrigo.

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-6593
[2] https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-contacts/pull/29
[3] https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-geolocation/pull/17
[4] https://github.com/apache/cordova-firefoxos/pull/7

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Gill" <st...@gmail.com>
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Sent: Friday, May 2, 2014 3:01:49 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

Releasing options for 3.5.0.

Option 1: Release like we always have.
* One zip containing zips of the platforms, js, docs, cli

Option 2: Break up platforms/tools/plugins
This is the option we are going towards with independent releases.
* Platforms go in the platforms directory
* Tools in the tools directory
* Plugins in the plugins directory
* where does cordova-js go? Tools directory? Since this will also be
released on npm, we need to release it on dist somewhere as well.
* do we need/want to release docs still? If yes, we should create a top
level docs directory
* cordova.io downloads section will need to reflect the change

You can see both option 1 & 2 at [1]

I personally like option 2 since this is the direction we are going towards
with independent releases. All the platforms will be released on npm once
the 3.5.0 vote concludes. I don't see much value in having one zip that has
zips of all of our platforms, cli, js + docs anymore.

[1] http://www.apache.org/dist/cordova/


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org> wrote:

> At this point, I have to agree. I found a couple more issues while sorting
> things out today that make me think it's not as obviously clean as it would
> have to be to be in 3.5.0.
>
> (The hope was originally that the public interface would be *exactly* the
> same, so it would be obvious that there were no compatibility issues, but
> it's a bit more complicated than that now :( )
>
> For now, it can stay on a branch, and we can experiment with it until it's
> ready for merging. No need to hold up the rest of the cadence train for one
> feature.
>
> Ian
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a future
> > release.
> > On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that
> this
> > > capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and
> > any
> > > breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads,
> sounds
> > > like it's not quite there yet.
> > >
> > > On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
> > > Monday?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for
> 3.5.0;
> > > >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> > > abstracting
> > > >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> > > >>
> > > >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> > > non-static
> > > >> fields on interfaces...
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works,
> > then
> > > we
> > > >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet.
> > > I'll
> > > >> have to let you know later today.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Rodrigo Silveira <rs...@mozilla.com>]

Hi Steve,

Got it! We don't have anything platform pending that has to make this release then, the PR I mentioned for firefoxos is still being reviewed it seems. For the plugin changes I'll wait to do the nagging when plugin releases is nearer :). 

Let me know how I can help with the release.

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steven Gill" <st...@gmail.com>
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Sent: Monday, May 5, 2014 11:53:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0
> 
> lib directory sounds like a good idea for cordova-lib + cordova-js.
> 
> I had the same thought about RC's last week. I chatted with Shaz about it
> and he seemed to agree as well. Instead of tagging with "rc1", we just tag
> the version it is (3.5.0). After the initial tag, people test. If errors
> are found and need to be fixed, we can just retag. This will save us time
> when it comes to releasing.
> 
> We will still release an RC for the CLI that points to the new platform
> tags.
> 
> In terms of voting, one thread or many threads don't matter to me. CLI
> release would have to wait until all of the platform votes finish though.
> If one platform vote fails, the cli vote would fail.
> 
> Rodrigo, thanks for stepping up to help! We aren't releasing plugins with
> this release, but we can do a plugins release shortly after. Let me know
> when you want to get that firefoxos pull request merged in.
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

lib directory sounds like a good idea for cordova-lib + cordova-js.

I had the same thought about RC's last week. I chatted with Shaz about it
and he seemed to agree as well. Instead of tagging with "rc1", we just tag
the version it is (3.5.0). After the initial tag, people test. If errors
are found and need to be fixed, we can just retag. This will save us time
when it comes to releasing.

We will still release an RC for the CLI that points to the new platform
tags.

In terms of voting, one thread or many threads don't matter to me. CLI
release would have to wait until all of the platform votes finish though.
If one platform vote fails, the cli vote would fail.

Rodrigo, thanks for stepping up to help! We aren't releasing plugins with
this release, but we can do a plugins release shortly after. Let me know
when you want to get that firefoxos pull request merged in.




On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:

> Option 2 makes sense to me.
> - Maybe let's make a lib/ directory, and cordova-js and cordova-lib can go
> there?
>   - I don't think we need to put this on dist/ until we start to use it via
> npm (I know it's there, but it's not used)
> - I don't think we should "release docs". Don't want to have to vote every
> time we make a tweak to them.
>
> Also - thanks Steve for updating
>
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md(everyone
> - have a look!)
> Some further thoughts on changes:
> - Should we do away with adding "rc1" to RCs? Presumably the existence of
> the release branch should serve the purpose os people being able to test
> the right thing. Once it's tested & it's vote time, we can't have "rc" in
> the version.
> - Voting might go smoother if we vote on platforms separately. E.g. I
> wouldn't be willing to vote platforms that I've never touched.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Releasing options for 3.5.0.
> >
> > Option 1: Release like we always have.
> > * One zip containing zips of the platforms, js, docs, cli
> >
> > Option 2: Break up platforms/tools/plugins
> > This is the option we are going towards with independent releases.
> > * Platforms go in the platforms directory
> > * Tools in the tools directory
> > * Plugins in the plugins directory
> > * where does cordova-js go? Tools directory? Since this will also be
> > released on npm, we need to release it on dist somewhere as well.
> > * do we need/want to release docs still? If yes, we should create a top
> > level docs directory
> > * cordova.io downloads section will need to reflect the change
> >
> > You can see both option 1 & 2 at [1]
> >
> > I personally like option 2 since this is the direction we are going
> towards
> > with independent releases. All the platforms will be released on npm once
> > the 3.5.0 vote concludes. I don't see much value in having one zip that
> has
> > zips of all of our platforms, cli, js + docs anymore.
> >
> > [1] http://www.apache.org/dist/cordova/
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > At this point, I have to agree. I found a couple more issues while
> > sorting
> > > things out today that make me think it's not as obviously clean as it
> > would
> > > have to be to be in 3.5.0.
> > >
> > > (The hope was originally that the public interface would be *exactly*
> the
> > > same, so it would be obvious that there were no compatibility issues,
> but
> > > it's a bit more complicated than that now :( )
> > >
> > > For now, it can stay on a branch, and we can experiment with it until
> > it's
> > > ready for merging. No need to hold up the rest of the cadence train for
> > one
> > > feature.
> > >
> > > Ian
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a
> > future
> > > > release.
> > > > On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that
> > > this
> > > > > capability be released when there is confidence that it works well,
> > and
> > > > any
> > > > > breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads,
> > > sounds
> > > > > like it's not quite there yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you
> till
> > > > > Monday?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <
> > iclelland@chromium.org
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for
> > > 3.5.0;
> > > > > >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> > > > > abstracting
> > > > > >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> > > > > non-static
> > > > > >> fields on interfaces...
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it
> works,
> > > > then
> > > > > we
> > > > > >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident
> > yet.
> > > > > I'll
> > > > > >> have to let you know later today.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>]

On May 5, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:

> Option 2 makes sense to me.

Same here.

> - I don't think we should "release docs". Don't want to have to vote every
> time we make a tweak to them.

I'm a bit torn on this one. I agree that voting would be tedious, and the docs are already generated and available online. But on the other hand, the docs are an output of the project, and in theory should be as important as the code. Given that we don't change old docs very often at all, how about if we publish the docs in source form, but only for the current version (don't include any of the old versions, or edge: just 3.5.0 in this case). Effectively that means we release one version of the docs at a time, and they don't get re-released unless there is an extraordinary situation. Is this a decent compromise? Would it make sense to also publish the generated docs (just that version) in the same zip as a convenience?

> - Should we do away with adding "rc1" to RCs? Presumably the existence of
> the release branch should serve the purpose os people being able to test
> the right thing. Once it's tested & it's vote time, we can't have "rc" in
> the version.

Yeah, stripping the "rc1" would technically seem to invalidate the vote because a new artifact would be generated, and there would be a new hash. How about if the contents of the zip don't have "rc1", but the filename does include the string "rc1"? So then promotion to dist is a move and a rename, but the contents stay the same.

> - Voting might go smoother if we vote on platforms separately. E.g. I
> wouldn't be willing to vote platforms that I've never touched.

Yes. I can run "coho verify-archive" easy enough, but I'll probably do a functional test only of my primary platform (android).

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>]

Option 2 makes sense to me.
- Maybe let's make a lib/ directory, and cordova-js and cordova-lib can go
there?
  - I don't think we need to put this on dist/ until we start to use it via
npm (I know it's there, but it's not used)
- I don't think we should "release docs". Don't want to have to vote every
time we make a tweak to them.

Also - thanks Steve for updating
https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md(everyone
- have a look!)
Some further thoughts on changes:
- Should we do away with adding "rc1" to RCs? Presumably the existence of
the release branch should serve the purpose os people being able to test
the right thing. Once it's tested & it's vote time, we can't have "rc" in
the version.
- Voting might go smoother if we vote on platforms separately. E.g. I
wouldn't be willing to vote platforms that I've never touched.



On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Releasing options for 3.5.0.
>
> Option 1: Release like we always have.
> * One zip containing zips of the platforms, js, docs, cli
>
> Option 2: Break up platforms/tools/plugins
> This is the option we are going towards with independent releases.
> * Platforms go in the platforms directory
> * Tools in the tools directory
> * Plugins in the plugins directory
> * where does cordova-js go? Tools directory? Since this will also be
> released on npm, we need to release it on dist somewhere as well.
> * do we need/want to release docs still? If yes, we should create a top
> level docs directory
> * cordova.io downloads section will need to reflect the change
>
> You can see both option 1 & 2 at [1]
>
> I personally like option 2 since this is the direction we are going towards
> with independent releases. All the platforms will be released on npm once
> the 3.5.0 vote concludes. I don't see much value in having one zip that has
> zips of all of our platforms, cli, js + docs anymore.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/dist/cordova/
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > At this point, I have to agree. I found a couple more issues while
> sorting
> > things out today that make me think it's not as obviously clean as it
> would
> > have to be to be in 3.5.0.
> >
> > (The hope was originally that the public interface would be *exactly* the
> > same, so it would be obvious that there were no compatibility issues, but
> > it's a bit more complicated than that now :( )
> >
> > For now, it can stay on a branch, and we can experiment with it until
> it's
> > ready for merging. No need to hold up the rest of the cadence train for
> one
> > feature.
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a
> future
> > > release.
> > > On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that
> > this
> > > > capability be released when there is confidence that it works well,
> and
> > > any
> > > > breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads,
> > sounds
> > > > like it's not quite there yet.
> > > >
> > > > On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
> > > > Monday?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <
> iclelland@chromium.org
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for
> > 3.5.0;
> > > > >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> > > > abstracting
> > > > >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> > > > non-static
> > > > >> fields on interfaces...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works,
> > > then
> > > > we
> > > > >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident
> yet.
> > > > I'll
> > > > >> have to let you know later today.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

Releasing options for 3.5.0.

Option 1: Release like we always have.
* One zip containing zips of the platforms, js, docs, cli

Option 2: Break up platforms/tools/plugins
This is the option we are going towards with independent releases.
* Platforms go in the platforms directory
* Tools in the tools directory
* Plugins in the plugins directory
* where does cordova-js go? Tools directory? Since this will also be
released on npm, we need to release it on dist somewhere as well.
* do we need/want to release docs still? If yes, we should create a top
level docs directory
* cordova.io downloads section will need to reflect the change

You can see both option 1 & 2 at [1]

I personally like option 2 since this is the direction we are going towards
with independent releases. All the platforms will be released on npm once
the 3.5.0 vote concludes. I don't see much value in having one zip that has
zips of all of our platforms, cli, js + docs anymore.

[1] http://www.apache.org/dist/cordova/


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org> wrote:

> At this point, I have to agree. I found a couple more issues while sorting
> things out today that make me think it's not as obviously clean as it would
> have to be to be in 3.5.0.
>
> (The hope was originally that the public interface would be *exactly* the
> same, so it would be obvious that there were no compatibility issues, but
> it's a bit more complicated than that now :( )
>
> For now, it can stay on a branch, and we can experiment with it until it's
> ready for merging. No need to hold up the rest of the cadence train for one
> feature.
>
> Ian
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a future
> > release.
> > On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that
> this
> > > capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and
> > any
> > > breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads,
> sounds
> > > like it's not quite there yet.
> > >
> > > On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
> > > Monday?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for
> 3.5.0;
> > > >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> > > abstracting
> > > >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> > > >>
> > > >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> > > non-static
> > > >> fields on interfaces...
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works,
> > then
> > > we
> > > >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet.
> > > I'll
> > > >> have to let you know later today.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>]

At this point, I have to agree. I found a couple more issues while sorting
things out today that make me think it's not as obviously clean as it would
have to be to be in 3.5.0.

(The hope was originally that the public interface would be *exactly* the
same, so it would be obvious that there were no compatibility issues, but
it's a bit more complicated than that now :( )

For now, it can stay on a branch, and we can experiment with it until it's
ready for merging. No need to hold up the rest of the cadence train for one
feature.

Ian


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a future
> release.
> On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that this
> > capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and
> any
> > breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads, sounds
> > like it's not quite there yet.
> >
> > On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
> > Monday?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for 3.5.0;
> > >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> > abstracting
> > >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> > >>
> > >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> > non-static
> > >> fields on interfaces...
> > >>
> > >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works,
> then
> > we
> > >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet.
> > I'll
> > >> have to let you know later today.
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

I have created the master release issue at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-6586


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a future
> release.
> On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that this
>> capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and any
>> breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads, sounds
>> like it's not quite there yet.
>>
>> On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
>> Monday?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for 3.5.0;
>> >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
>> abstracting
>> >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
>> >>
>> >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
>> non-static
>> >> fields on interfaces...
>> >>
>> >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works,
>> then we
>> >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet.
>> I'll
>> >> have to let you know later today.
>>
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a future
release.
On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that this
> capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and any
> breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads, sounds
> like it's not quite there yet.
>
> On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
> Monday?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for 3.5.0;
> >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> abstracting
> >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> >>
> >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> non-static
> >> fields on interfaces...
> >>
> >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works, then
> we
> >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet.
> I'll
> >> have to let you know later today.
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>]

Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that this capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and any breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads, sounds like it's not quite there yet.

On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:

> Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till Monday?
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
>> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for 3.5.0;
>> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by abstracting
>> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
>> 
>> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or non-static
>> fields on interfaces...
>> 
>> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works, then we
>> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet. I'll
>> have to let you know later today.

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>]

Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till Monday?


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org> wrote:

> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for 3.5.0;
> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by abstracting
> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
>
> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or non-static
> fields on interfaces...
>
> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works, then we
> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet. I'll
> have to let you know later today.
>
> Ian
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Steven.  Lets see what Joe/Ian say about cordova-android webview
> > support.
> >
> > -Michal
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello everyone!
> > >
> > > Shall we move forward with 3.5.0 release?
> > >
> > > Please list any issues that exist & reasons to postpone. I know both
> > > windows platforms and amazon fireos both really want this release to
> get
> > > out asap.
> > >
> > > Proposed timeline:
> > > - RC this Friday/next Monday (no vote required, cli published under rc
> > tag)
> > > - Final tag & vote either May 8 or May 12 (lets not release on friday).
> > >
> > > I volunteer to be release master for this release.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Josh Soref <js...@blackberry.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > purplecabbage wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I would like to see 3.5.0 ready to vote on late next week.
> > > >
> > > > I won¹t be around then (Passover).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bryan + I will try to ensure that 3.5 works nicely w/ BlackBerry 10
> > early
> > > > next week (this week is overŠ).
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone can review the announce bits.
> > > >
> > > > My general requests:
> > > > 1. Please spell brands correctly (Tizen, FirefoxOS, BlackBerry, iOS,
> Š)
> > > > 2. Please `` commands, arguments, filenames, and file types
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Ian Clelland <ic...@chromium.org>]

Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for 3.5.0;
there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by abstracting
CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.

/me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or non-static
fields on interfaces...

I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works, then we
might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet. I'll
have to let you know later today.

Ian


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:

> Thanks Steven.  Lets see what Joe/Ian say about cordova-android webview
> support.
>
> -Michal
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone!
> >
> > Shall we move forward with 3.5.0 release?
> >
> > Please list any issues that exist & reasons to postpone. I know both
> > windows platforms and amazon fireos both really want this release to get
> > out asap.
> >
> > Proposed timeline:
> > - RC this Friday/next Monday (no vote required, cli published under rc
> tag)
> > - Final tag & vote either May 8 or May 12 (lets not release on friday).
> >
> > I volunteer to be release master for this release.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Josh Soref <js...@blackberry.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > purplecabbage wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would like to see 3.5.0 ready to vote on late next week.
> > >
> > > I won¹t be around then (Passover).
> > >
> > >
> > > Bryan + I will try to ensure that 3.5 works nicely w/ BlackBerry 10
> early
> > > next week (this week is overŠ).
> > >
> > > Hopefully someone can review the announce bits.
> > >
> > > My general requests:
> > > 1. Please spell brands correctly (Tizen, FirefoxOS, BlackBerry, iOS, Š)
> > > 2. Please `` commands, arguments, filenames, and file types
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>]

Thanks Steven.  Lets see what Joe/Ian say about cordova-android webview
support.

-Michal


On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello everyone!
>
> Shall we move forward with 3.5.0 release?
>
> Please list any issues that exist & reasons to postpone. I know both
> windows platforms and amazon fireos both really want this release to get
> out asap.
>
> Proposed timeline:
> - RC this Friday/next Monday (no vote required, cli published under rc tag)
> - Final tag & vote either May 8 or May 12 (lets not release on friday).
>
> I volunteer to be release master for this release.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Josh Soref <js...@blackberry.com> wrote:
>
> > purplecabbage wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to see 3.5.0 ready to vote on late next week.
> >
> > I won¹t be around then (Passover).
> >
> >
> > Bryan + I will try to ensure that 3.5 works nicely w/ BlackBerry 10 early
> > next week (this week is overŠ).
> >
> > Hopefully someone can review the announce bits.
> >
> > My general requests:
> > 1. Please spell brands correctly (Tizen, FirefoxOS, BlackBerry, iOS, Š)
> > 2. Please `` commands, arguments, filenames, and file types
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

Hello everyone!

Shall we move forward with 3.5.0 release?

Please list any issues that exist & reasons to postpone. I know both
windows platforms and amazon fireos both really want this release to get
out asap.

Proposed timeline:
- RC this Friday/next Monday (no vote required, cli published under rc tag)
- Final tag & vote either May 8 or May 12 (lets not release on friday).

I volunteer to be release master for this release.




On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Josh Soref <js...@blackberry.com> wrote:

> purplecabbage wrote:
>
> > I would like to see 3.5.0 ready to vote on late next week.
>
> I won¹t be around then (Passover).
>
>
> Bryan + I will try to ensure that 3.5 works nicely w/ BlackBerry 10 early
> next week (this week is overŠ).
>
> Hopefully someone can review the announce bits.
>
> My general requests:
> 1. Please spell brands correctly (Tizen, FirefoxOS, BlackBerry, iOS, Š)
> 2. Please `` commands, arguments, filenames, and file types
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Josh Soref <js...@blackberry.com>]

purplecabbage wrote:

> I would like to see 3.5.0 ready to vote on late next week.

I won¹t be around then (Passover).


Bryan + I will try to ensure that 3.5 works nicely w/ BlackBerry 10 early
next week (this week is overŠ).

Hopefully someone can review the announce bits.

My general requests:
1. Please spell brands correctly (Tizen, FirefoxOS, BlackBerry, iOS, Š)
2. Please `` commands, arguments, filenames, and file types

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[purplecabbage <pu...@gmail.com>]

I would like to see 3.5.0 ready to vote on late next week. I have some house keeping to do, as there are big fixes for windows 8 and wp8 that need to be pushed out. I've been away for /build so haven't been able to do much this week. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 4, 2014, at 9:07 AM, "Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH)" <pa...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> Once 3.4.1 is release, how long before we start looking at 3.5.0 ? 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Gill [mailto:stevengill97@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 10:52 AM
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0
> 
> I just noticed Shaz tagged 3.4.1 a few days ago. I will move forward with this now.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Sebastien Blanc <sc...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 
>> Hi !
>> 
>> Sorry to bump this thread up but any estimate on when 3.4.1 will be 
>> released ? The xcode 5.1 issue is quite blocking for a lot of users.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Seb
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I think our new flow is that *anything* meant for end users should 
>>> go on dist/, and it's the other channels (npm) that are optional.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I expect that if it is going out to users it should have a vote.  
>>>> Since
>>> we
>>>> need to roll CLI to actually surface this to users, we can 
>>>> probably
>> vote
>>>> for both at that time.
>>>> 
>>>> -Michal
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Steven Gill 
>>>> <st...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
>>>>>> On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the 
>>>>>> dist
>>>>> folder,
>>>>>> and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. 
>>>>>>> I'll
>> do
>>>> more
>>>>>>> testing over the weekend.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron 
>>>>>>> <sh...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure 
>>>>>>>> out
>> any
>>>> new
>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>> regarding independent releases.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Plan:
>>>>>>>> - branch off 3.4.0 release
>>>>>>>> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes,
>>> callback
>>>>> id
>>>>>>>> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
>>>>>>>> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
>>>>>>>> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to 
>>>>>>>> master as
>>>> well).
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <
>>>> stevengill97@gmail.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It 
>>>>>>>>> would
>> be
>>>>>> simpler
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> terms of docs + js.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Shazron, would that work for you?
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" 
>>>>>>>>> <agrieve@chromium.org
>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> From what I understand of the changes, it should work 
>>>>>>>>>> fine to
>>> do
>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> 3.4.1
>>>>>>>>>> and just leave the JS as is.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <
>>>> cmarcelk@gmail.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before 
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> other
>>>>>>>>> platforms
>>>>>>>>>>> is going to create a mess when it comes time to 
>>>>>>>>>>> release the
>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>> platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> cordova-js
>>>>>>>>>> and/or
>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to 
>>>>>>>>>>> Michal's
>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <
>> mmocny@google.com
>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Before I even try to grok the other questions, why 
>>>>>>>>>>>> can't
>> we
>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>> tag
>>>>>>>>>> iOS
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.4.1?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the
>> cadence
>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> version all the platforms separately, like how we do 
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>> the
>>>>>> plugins
>>>>>>>>> now.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
>>>>>>>>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The best course of action for the future is to set 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> build
>>>>>>>>> label in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordovajs to be just the sha.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js 
>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>> floats
>>>>>>>>> separate
>>>>>>>>>>> from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps 
>>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>> just
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> sha.
>>>>>>>>>>> Every git repo has its own master and own independent
>>>> versioning
>>>>>>>>>> sequence.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> That does beg the question if there is some kind of 
>>>>>>>>>>> overall
>>>>>> snapshot
>>>>>>>>> id
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases 
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>> dist.
>> 

RE: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

["Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH)" <pa...@microsoft.com>]

Once 3.4.1 is release, how long before we start looking at 3.5.0 ? 

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Gill [mailto:stevengill97@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 10:52 AM
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

I just noticed Shaz tagged 3.4.1 a few days ago. I will move forward with this now.


On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Sebastien Blanc <sc...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi !
>
> Sorry to bump this thread up but any estimate on when 3.4.1 will be 
> released ? The xcode 5.1 issue is quite blocking for a lot of users.
>
> Regards,
> Seb
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I think our new flow is that *anything* meant for end users should 
> > go on dist/, and it's the other channels (npm) that are optional.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I expect that if it is going out to users it should have a vote.  
> > > Since
> > we
> > > need to roll CLI to actually surface this to users, we can 
> > > probably
> vote
> > > for both at that time.
> > >
> > > -Michal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Steven Gill 
> > > <st...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
> > > > On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the 
> > > > > dist
> > > > folder,
> > > > > and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. 
> > > > > > I'll
> do
> > > more
> > > > > > testing over the weekend.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron 
> > > > > > <sh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure 
> > > > > >> out
> any
> > > new
> > > > > way
> > > > > >> regarding independent releases.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Plan:
> > > > > >> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> > > > > >> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes,
> > callback
> > > > id
> > > > > >> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> > > > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> > > > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to 
> > > > > >> master as
> > > well).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <
> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It 
> > > > > >>> would
> be
> > > > > simpler
> > > > > >>> in
> > > > > >>> terms of docs + js.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Shazron, would that work for you?
> > > > > >>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" 
> > > > > >>> <agrieve@chromium.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work 
> > > > > >>> > fine to
> > do
> > > a
> > > > > >>> 3.4.1
> > > > > >>> > and just leave the JS as is.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <
> > > cmarcelk@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before 
> > > > > >>> > > the
> > other
> > > > > >>> platforms
> > > > > >>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to 
> > > > > >>> > > release the
> > > other
> > > > > >>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes 
> > > > > >>> > > to
> > > > cordova-js
> > > > > >>> > and/or
> > > > > >>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to 
> > > > > >>> > > Michal's
> > > > question.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <
> mmocny@google.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why 
> > > > > >>> > > > can't
> we
> > > > just
> > > > > >>> tag
> > > > > >>> > iOS
> > > > > >>> > > as
> > > > > >>> > > > 3.4.1?
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the
> cadence
> > > > > release
> > > > > >>> is
> > > > > >>> > to
> > > > > >>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do 
> > > > > >>> > > for
> the
> > > > > plugins
> > > > > >>> now.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
> > > > > >>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> > > >
> > > > > >>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set 
> > > > > >>> > > >> the
> > build
> > > > > >>> label in
> > > > > >>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js 
> > > > > >>> > > also
> > floats
> > > > > >>> separate
> > > > > >>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps 
> > > > > >>> > > it's
> > just
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> sha.
> > > > > >>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent
> > > versioning
> > > > > >>> > sequence.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of 
> > > > > >>> > > overall
> > > > > snapshot
> > > > > >>> id
> > > > > >>> > to
> > > > > >>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases 
> > > > > >>> > > to
> > dist.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

I just noticed Shaz tagged 3.4.1 a few days ago. I will move forward with
this now.


On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Sebastien Blanc <sc...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi !
>
> Sorry to bump this thread up but any estimate on when 3.4.1 will be
> released ? The xcode 5.1 issue is quite blocking for a lot of users.
>
> Regards,
> Seb
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I think our new flow is that *anything* meant for end users should go on
> > dist/, and it's the other channels (npm) that are optional.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I expect that if it is going out to users it should have a vote.  Since
> > we
> > > need to roll CLI to actually surface this to users, we can probably
> vote
> > > for both at that time.
> > >
> > > -Michal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
> > > > On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the dist
> > > > folder,
> > > > > and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll
> do
> > > more
> > > > > > testing over the weekend.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out
> any
> > > new
> > > > > way
> > > > > >> regarding independent releases.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Plan:
> > > > > >> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> > > > > >> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes,
> > callback
> > > > id
> > > > > >> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> > > > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> > > > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as
> > > well).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <
> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would
> be
> > > > > simpler
> > > > > >>> in
> > > > > >>> terms of docs + js.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Shazron, would that work for you?
> > > > > >>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <agrieve@chromium.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to
> > do
> > > a
> > > > > >>> 3.4.1
> > > > > >>> > and just leave the JS as is.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <
> > > cmarcelk@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the
> > other
> > > > > >>> platforms
> > > > > >>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the
> > > other
> > > > > >>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to
> > > > cordova-js
> > > > > >>> > and/or
> > > > > >>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's
> > > > question.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <
> mmocny@google.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't
> we
> > > > just
> > > > > >>> tag
> > > > > >>> > iOS
> > > > > >>> > > as
> > > > > >>> > > > 3.4.1?
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the
> cadence
> > > > > release
> > > > > >>> is
> > > > > >>> > to
> > > > > >>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for
> the
> > > > > plugins
> > > > > >>> now.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
> > > > > >>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> > > >
> > > > > >>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the
> > build
> > > > > >>> label in
> > > > > >>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also
> > floats
> > > > > >>> separate
> > > > > >>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's
> > just
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> sha.
> > > > > >>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent
> > > versioning
> > > > > >>> > sequence.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall
> > > > > snapshot
> > > > > >>> id
> > > > > >>> > to
> > > > > >>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to
> > dist.
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Sebastien Blanc <sc...@gmail.com>]

Hi !

Sorry to bump this thread up but any estimate on when 3.4.1 will be
released ? The xcode 5.1 issue is quite blocking for a lot of users.

Regards,
Seb


On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:

> I think our new flow is that *anything* meant for end users should go on
> dist/, and it's the other channels (npm) that are optional.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > I expect that if it is going out to users it should have a vote.  Since
> we
> > need to roll CLI to actually surface this to users, we can probably vote
> > for both at that time.
> >
> > -Michal
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
> > > On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the dist
> > > folder,
> > > > and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll do
> > more
> > > > > testing over the weekend.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any
> > new
> > > > way
> > > > >> regarding independent releases.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Plan:
> > > > >> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> > > > >> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes,
> callback
> > > id
> > > > >> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> > > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> > > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as
> > well).
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <
> > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be
> > > > simpler
> > > > >>> in
> > > > >>> terms of docs + js.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Shazron, would that work for you?
> > > > >>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to
> do
> > a
> > > > >>> 3.4.1
> > > > >>> > and just leave the JS as is.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <
> > cmarcelk@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the
> other
> > > > >>> platforms
> > > > >>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the
> > other
> > > > >>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to
> > > cordova-js
> > > > >>> > and/or
> > > > >>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's
> > > question.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@google.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we
> > > just
> > > > >>> tag
> > > > >>> > iOS
> > > > >>> > > as
> > > > >>> > > > 3.4.1?
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence
> > > > release
> > > > >>> is
> > > > >>> > to
> > > > >>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the
> > > > plugins
> > > > >>> now.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
> > > > >>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >>> > > >
> > > > >>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the
> build
> > > > >>> label in
> > > > >>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also
> floats
> > > > >>> separate
> > > > >>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's
> just
> > > the
> > > > >>> sha.
> > > > >>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent
> > versioning
> > > > >>> > sequence.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall
> > > > snapshot
> > > > >>> id
> > > > >>> > to
> > > > >>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to
> dist.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>]

I think our new flow is that *anything* meant for end users should go on
dist/, and it's the other channels (npm) that are optional.


On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:

> I expect that if it is going out to users it should have a vote.  Since we
> need to roll CLI to actually surface this to users, we can probably vote
> for both at that time.
>
> -Michal
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
> > On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the dist
> > folder,
> > > and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll do
> more
> > > > testing over the weekend.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any
> new
> > > way
> > > >> regarding independent releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> Plan:
> > > >> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> > > >> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes, callback
> > id
> > > >> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> > > >> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as
> well).
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <
> stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be
> > > simpler
> > > >>> in
> > > >>> terms of docs + js.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Shazron, would that work for you?
> > > >>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do
> a
> > > >>> 3.4.1
> > > >>> > and just leave the JS as is.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <
> cmarcelk@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other
> > > >>> platforms
> > > >>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the
> other
> > > >>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to
> > cordova-js
> > > >>> > and/or
> > > >>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's
> > question.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we
> > just
> > > >>> tag
> > > >>> > iOS
> > > >>> > > as
> > > >>> > > > 3.4.1?
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence
> > > release
> > > >>> is
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the
> > > plugins
> > > >>> now.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
> > > >>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build
> > > >>> label in
> > > >>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats
> > > >>> separate
> > > >>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just
> > the
> > > >>> sha.
> > > >>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent
> versioning
> > > >>> > sequence.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall
> > > snapshot
> > > >>> id
> > > >>> > to
> > > >>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>]

I expect that if it is going out to users it should have a vote.  Since we
need to roll CLI to actually surface this to users, we can probably vote
for both at that time.

-Michal


On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:14 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
> On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the dist
> folder,
> > and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll do more
> > > testing over the weekend.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any new
> > way
> > >> regarding independent releases.
> > >>
> > >> Plan:
> > >> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> > >> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes, callback
> id
> > >> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> > >> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> > >> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as well).
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be
> > simpler
> > >>> in
> > >>> terms of docs + js.
> > >>>
> > >>> Shazron, would that work for you?
> > >>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a
> > >>> 3.4.1
> > >>> > and just leave the JS as is.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cmarcelk@gmail.com
> >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other
> > >>> platforms
> > >>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
> > >>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to
> cordova-js
> > >>> > and/or
> > >>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's
> question.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we
> just
> > >>> tag
> > >>> > iOS
> > >>> > > as
> > >>> > > > 3.4.1?
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence
> > release
> > >>> is
> > >>> > to
> > >>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the
> > plugins
> > >>> now.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
> > >>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > >>> > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build
> > >>> label in
> > >>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats
> > >>> separate
> > >>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just
> the
> > >>> sha.
> > >>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning
> > >>> > sequence.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall
> > snapshot
> > >>> id
> > >>> > to
> > >>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

I think we can vote on it when we vote on the tools.
On Mar 28, 2014 4:43 PM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the dist folder,
> and only downloaded by the CLI tool?
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll do more
> > testing over the weekend.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any new
> way
> >> regarding independent releases.
> >>
> >> Plan:
> >> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> >> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes, callback id
> >> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> >> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> >> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as well).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be
> simpler
> >>> in
> >>> terms of docs + js.
> >>>
> >>> Shazron, would that work for you?
> >>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a
> >>> 3.4.1
> >>> > and just leave the JS as is.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other
> >>> platforms
> >>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
> >>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js
> >>> > and/or
> >>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com>
> wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just
> >>> tag
> >>> > iOS
> >>> > > as
> >>> > > > 3.4.1?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence
> release
> >>> is
> >>> > to
> >>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the
> plugins
> >>> now.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
> >>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build
> >>> label in
> >>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats
> >>> separate
> >>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the
> >>> sha.
> >>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning
> >>> > sequence.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall
> snapshot
> >>> id
> >>> > to
> >>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

I assume this does not need a vote since it doesn't go in the dist folder,
and only downloaded by the CLI tool?


On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll do more
> testing over the weekend.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any new way
>> regarding independent releases.
>>
>> Plan:
>> - branch off 3.4.0 release
>> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes, callback id
>> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
>> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
>> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as well).
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be simpler
>>> in
>>> terms of docs + js.
>>>
>>> Shazron, would that work for you?
>>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a
>>> 3.4.1
>>> > and just leave the JS as is.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other
>>> platforms
>>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
>>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js
>>> > and/or
>>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just
>>> tag
>>> > iOS
>>> > > as
>>> > > > 3.4.1?
>>> > >
>>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence release
>>> is
>>> > to
>>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the plugins
>>> now.
>>> > >
>>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
>>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build
>>> label in
>>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
>>> > >
>>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats
>>> separate
>>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the
>>> sha.
>>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning
>>> > sequence.
>>> > >
>>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall snapshot
>>> id
>>> > to
>>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

iOS: Changes are in the 3.4.x branch, and 3.4.1 is tagged. I'll do more
testing over the weekend.



On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any new way
> regarding independent releases.
>
> Plan:
> - branch off 3.4.0 release
> - cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes, callback id
> change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
> - version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
> - version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as well).
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be simpler
>> in
>> terms of docs + js.
>>
>> Shazron, would that work for you?
>> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a 3.4.1
>> > and just leave the JS as is.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other
>> platforms
>> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
>> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js
>> > and/or
>> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.
>> > >
>> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just tag
>> > iOS
>> > > as
>> > > > 3.4.1?
>> > >
>> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence release
>> is
>> > to
>> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the plugins
>> now.
>> > >
>> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <
>> stevengill97@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build label
>> in
>> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
>> > >
>> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats
>> separate
>> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the
>> sha.
>> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning
>> > sequence.
>> > >
>> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall snapshot
>> id
>> > to
>> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Yeah lets do a 3.4.1 iOS, simpler for now until we figure out any new way
regarding independent releases.

Plan:
- branch off 3.4.0 release
- cherry-pick commits for template changes, script changes, callback id
change (to allow callback ids with periods in them)
- version it 3.4.1 in VERSION in this branch only
- version it 3.4.1 in CDVAvailability.h (copy back to master as well).



On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be simpler in
> terms of docs + js.
>
> Shazron, would that work for you?
> On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a 3.4.1
> > and just leave the JS as is.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other
> platforms
> > > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
> > > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js
> > and/or
> > > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.
> > >
> > > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just tag
> > iOS
> > > as
> > > > 3.4.1?
> > >
> > > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence release is
> > to
> > > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the plugins
> now.
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build label
> in
> > > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> > >
> > > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats separate
> > > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the
> sha.
> > > Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning
> > sequence.
> > >
> > > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall snapshot id
> > to
> > > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

I don't have any problem with going the 3.4.1 route. It would be simpler in
terms of docs + js.

Shazron, would that work for you?
On Mar 28, 2014 8:27 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:

> From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a 3.4.1
> and just leave the JS as is.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other platforms
> > is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
> > platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js
> and/or
> > cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.
> >
> > On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just tag
> iOS
> > as
> > > 3.4.1?
> >
> > Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence release is
> to
> > version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the plugins now.
> >
> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build label in
> > >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
> >
> > Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats separate
> > from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the sha.
> > Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning
> sequence.
> >
> > That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall snapshot id
> to
> > replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>]

>From what I understand of the changes, it should work fine to do a 3.4.1
and just leave the JS as is.


On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other platforms
> is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other
> platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js and/or
> cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.
>
> On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just tag iOS
> as
> > 3.4.1?
>
> Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence release is to
> version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the plugins now.
>
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The best course of action for the future is to set the build label in
> >> cordovajs to be just the sha.
>
> Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats separate
> from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the sha.
> Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning sequence.
>
> That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall snapshot id to
> replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>]

It feels like trying to tag only iOS as 3.5.0 before the other platforms is going to create a mess when it comes time to release the other platforms, especially if there are subsequent changes to cordova-js and/or cordova-ios. I don't like moving tags. So +1 to Michal's question.

On Mar 27, 2014, at 9:56 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com> wrote:

> Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just tag iOS as
> 3.4.1?

Perhaps the long-term answer for doing away with the cadence release is to version all the platforms separately, like how we do for the plugins now.

> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> The best course of action for the future is to set the build label in
>> cordovajs to be just the sha.

Maybe in the future, the build label in cordova-js also floats separate from the versions of all the platforms. Yeah, perhaps it's just the sha. Every git repo has its own master and own independent versioning sequence.

That does beg the question if there is some kind of overall snapshot id to replace the cadver, and when do we do Apache releases to dist.

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Michal Mocny <mm...@google.com>]

Before I even try to grok the other questions, why can't we just tag iOS as
3.4.1?


On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Okay, I just chatted with Shaz.
>
> Since this is urgent, this is what we are thinking.
> * Shaz tags iOS 3.5.0 (Monday)
> * CLI cadence version will stay 3.4.0 but semver version will have a major
> bump. I know we have talked about removing the cadence version, but I'd
> like to give more notice to other tools who may be relying on that.
> * CLI will point to 3.5.0 for iOS
> * Tools release goes out Monday/Tuesday. This includes the plugman fix FFOS
> desperately needs.
> * Not touching docs for now
>
> * Cordova JS is a big question mark.
>
> If we build from master, the current build label inside the js will be
> "3.5.0-dev-607ca9d". This does include the sha, so if we decide to tag it
> 3.5.0 later, the sha will still be able to represent the commit for the JS
> when iOS was tagged.
>
> BIG QUESTION: If we change the version to 3.5.0 from 3.5.0-dev, should we
> tag the js? When other platforms are ready to tag, do we retag? do we tag
> 3.5.1?
>
> The best course of action for the future is to set the build label in
> cordovajs to be just the sha.
>
> For now, I propose we just use cordova-js on master (aka
> 3.5.0-dev-607ca9d). We can work on modifying the build number to just the
> sha for the next release.
>
>
> In regards to tools, I am ready to initiate a vote thread for the tools
> now. All the tests are passing and I have merged in some pull requests. I
> don't think it makes a lot of sense to do it though if we are planning on
> doing another one at the start of next week. So I will hold off until then.
> If people have pull requests they want to get into the tools release for
> next week, let me know.
>
> Once Apachecon is over (maybe even at Apachecon), I will start implementing
> some of work we have been discussing the last couple of weeks about
> releasing. Andrew wrote up a great proposal of next steps at
> http://markmail.org/message/76cfn4tbboqfcwxy.
>
> -Steve
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Urgent as in -- ppl using Xcode 5.1 can't compile without mucking about a
> > lot in project settings, and I mean a lot of settings. And even then they
> > might not get it right. But the more urgent issue is, on 64-bit
> platforms,
> > the current iOS code will crash because of the requirement of explicit
> > casting of their low-level message sending functions.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Since we haven't decided on whether to break out platforms, we should
> > > probably attempt to continue with the release cadence.  How urgent is
> > > the iOS update? Could it be a 3.4.x release on its own?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this.
> Would
> > be
> > > > happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should
> clear
> > up
> > > > for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who
> > need
> > > to
> > > >> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before
> ApacheCon I
> > > >> hope.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <
> agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it
> > to
> > > >> patch
> > > >> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> > > >> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> > > >> > CordovaLib?
> > > >> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
> > > >> Architecture
> > > >> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
> wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/
> andrew's
> > > other
> > > >> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
> > > >> versioning
> > > >> > of
> > > >> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new
> > steps
> > > >> more
> > > >> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it
> should
> > > be.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution
> > last
> > > >> > year.
> > > >> > > No
> > > >> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <
> > > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably
> > > we'd
> > > >> > want
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update
> > script
> > > >> (not
> > > >> > > sure
> > > >> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a
> > > split-up-the-platform-release
> > > >> > > > proposal,
> > > >> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release
> > process
> > > >> > though
> > > >> > > > now
> > > >> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > > >> > > > > ,
> > > >> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to
> it
> > > :)
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <
> > bowserj@gmail.com>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > NOT IT!
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing
> with
> > > >> > > platforms.
> > > >> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've
> been
> > > >> > working
> > > >> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > > >> mmocny@chromium.org
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the
> > > platforms,
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > > > > remove
> > > >> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the
> > > dist/
> > > >> > > > artifacts
> > > >> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have
> > > different
> > > >> > > > > > individual
> > > >> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially
> > shipping
> > > >> > > weekly /
> > > >> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should
> leave
> > > that
> > > >> > for
> > > >> > > > > > future
> > > >> > > > > > > releases.)
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release
> > managers.
> > > >>  NOT
> > > >> > > IT!
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > -Michal
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> > > >> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release
> soon?
> > > >> > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

Okay, I just chatted with Shaz.

Since this is urgent, this is what we are thinking.
* Shaz tags iOS 3.5.0 (Monday)
* CLI cadence version will stay 3.4.0 but semver version will have a major
bump. I know we have talked about removing the cadence version, but I'd
like to give more notice to other tools who may be relying on that.
* CLI will point to 3.5.0 for iOS
* Tools release goes out Monday/Tuesday. This includes the plugman fix FFOS
desperately needs.
* Not touching docs for now

* Cordova JS is a big question mark.

If we build from master, the current build label inside the js will be
"3.5.0-dev-607ca9d". This does include the sha, so if we decide to tag it
3.5.0 later, the sha will still be able to represent the commit for the JS
when iOS was tagged.

BIG QUESTION: If we change the version to 3.5.0 from 3.5.0-dev, should we
tag the js? When other platforms are ready to tag, do we retag? do we tag
3.5.1?

The best course of action for the future is to set the build label in
cordovajs to be just the sha.

For now, I propose we just use cordova-js on master (aka
3.5.0-dev-607ca9d). We can work on modifying the build number to just the
sha for the next release.


In regards to tools, I am ready to initiate a vote thread for the tools
now. All the tests are passing and I have merged in some pull requests. I
don't think it makes a lot of sense to do it though if we are planning on
doing another one at the start of next week. So I will hold off until then.
If people have pull requests they want to get into the tools release for
next week, let me know.

Once Apachecon is over (maybe even at Apachecon), I will start implementing
some of work we have been discussing the last couple of weeks about
releasing. Andrew wrote up a great proposal of next steps at
http://markmail.org/message/76cfn4tbboqfcwxy.

-Steve




On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Urgent as in -- ppl using Xcode 5.1 can't compile without mucking about a
> lot in project settings, and I mean a lot of settings. And even then they
> might not get it right. But the more urgent issue is, on 64-bit platforms,
> the current iOS code will crash because of the requirement of explicit
> casting of their low-level message sending functions.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Since we haven't decided on whether to break out platforms, we should
> > probably attempt to continue with the release cadence.  How urgent is
> > the iOS update? Could it be a 3.4.x release on its own?
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com>
> > wrote:
> > > I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this. Would
> be
> > > happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should clear
> up
> > > for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who
> need
> > to
> > >> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I
> > >> hope.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it
> to
> > >> patch
> > >> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> > >> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> > >> > CordovaLib?
> > >> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
> > >> Architecture
> > >> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's
> > other
> > >> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
> > >> versioning
> > >> > of
> > >> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new
> steps
> > >> more
> > >> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should
> > be.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution
> last
> > >> > year.
> > >> > > No
> > >> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <
> > agrieve@chromium.org
> > >> >
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably
> > we'd
> > >> > want
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update
> script
> > >> (not
> > >> > > sure
> > >> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a
> > split-up-the-platform-release
> > >> > > > proposal,
> > >> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release
> process
> > >> > though
> > >> > > > now
> > >> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > >> > > > > ,
> > >> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it
> > :)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <
> bowserj@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > NOT IT!
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> > >> > > platforms.
> > >> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
> > >> > working
> > >> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > >> mmocny@chromium.org
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the
> > platforms,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > > > > remove
> > >> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the
> > dist/
> > >> > > > artifacts
> > >> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have
> > different
> > >> > > > > > individual
> > >> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially
> shipping
> > >> > > weekly /
> > >> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave
> > that
> > >> > for
> > >> > > > > > future
> > >> > > > > > > releases.)
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release
> managers.
> > >>  NOT
> > >> > > IT!
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > -Michal
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> > >> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Urgent as in -- ppl using Xcode 5.1 can't compile without mucking about a
lot in project settings, and I mean a lot of settings. And even then they
might not get it right. But the more urgent issue is, on 64-bit platforms,
the current iOS code will crash because of the requirement of explicit
casting of their low-level message sending functions.


On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since we haven't decided on whether to break out platforms, we should
> probably attempt to continue with the release cadence.  How urgent is
> the iOS update? Could it be a 3.4.x release on its own?
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com>
> wrote:
> > I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this. Would be
> > happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should clear up
> > for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who need
> to
> >> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I
> >> hope.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it to
> >> patch
> >> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> >> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> >> > CordovaLib?
> >> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
> >> Architecture
> >> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's
> other
> >> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
> >> versioning
> >> > of
> >> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps
> >> more
> >> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should
> be.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last
> >> > year.
> >> > > No
> >> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <
> agrieve@chromium.org
> >> >
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably
> we'd
> >> > want
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update script
> >> (not
> >> > > sure
> >> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a
> split-up-the-platform-release
> >> > > > proposal,
> >> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process
> >> > though
> >> > > > now
> >> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> >> > > > > ,
> >> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it
> :)
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > NOT IT!
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> >> > > platforms.
> >> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
> >> > working
> >> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
> >> mmocny@chromium.org
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the
> platforms,
> >> > and
> >> > > > > > remove
> >> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the
> dist/
> >> > > > artifacts
> >> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have
> different
> >> > > > > > individual
> >> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping
> >> > > weekly /
> >> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave
> that
> >> > for
> >> > > > > > future
> >> > > > > > > releases.)
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.
> >>  NOT
> >> > > IT!
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > -Michal
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> >> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

I suppose we could do a 3.4.1 just for iOS, plus update Cordova CLI. That's
looking more likely.


On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I also don't feel confident in being able to do this before Apachecon.
>
> Would it be possible to do just an iOS release and update the cordova CLI
> to use the newer iOS version?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Since we haven't decided on whether to break out platforms, we should
> > probably attempt to continue with the release cadence.  How urgent is
> > the iOS update? Could it be a 3.4.x release on its own?
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com>
> > wrote:
> > > I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this. Would
> be
> > > happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should clear
> up
> > > for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who
> need
> > to
> > >> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I
> > >> hope.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it
> to
> > >> patch
> > >> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> > >> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> > >> > CordovaLib?
> > >> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
> > >> Architecture
> > >> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's
> > other
> > >> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
> > >> versioning
> > >> > of
> > >> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new
> steps
> > >> more
> > >> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should
> > be.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution
> last
> > >> > year.
> > >> > > No
> > >> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <
> > agrieve@chromium.org
> > >> >
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably
> > we'd
> > >> > want
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update
> script
> > >> (not
> > >> > > sure
> > >> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a
> > split-up-the-platform-release
> > >> > > > proposal,
> > >> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release
> process
> > >> > though
> > >> > > > now
> > >> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > >> > > > > ,
> > >> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it
> > :)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <
> bowserj@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > NOT IT!
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> > >> > > platforms.
> > >> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
> > >> > working
> > >> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
> > >> mmocny@chromium.org
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the
> > platforms,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > > > > remove
> > >> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the
> > dist/
> > >> > > > artifacts
> > >> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have
> > different
> > >> > > > > > individual
> > >> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially
> shipping
> > >> > > weekly /
> > >> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave
> > that
> > >> > for
> > >> > > > > > future
> > >> > > > > > > releases.)
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release
> managers.
> > >>  NOT
> > >> > > IT!
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > -Michal
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> > >> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>]

I also don't feel confident in being able to do this before Apachecon.

Would it be possible to do just an iOS release and update the cordova CLI
to use the newer iOS version?



On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Since we haven't decided on whether to break out platforms, we should
> probably attempt to continue with the release cadence.  How urgent is
> the iOS update? Could it be a 3.4.x release on its own?
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com>
> wrote:
> > I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this. Would be
> > happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should clear up
> > for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who need
> to
> >> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I
> >> hope.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it to
> >> patch
> >> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> >> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> >> > CordovaLib?
> >> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
> >> Architecture
> >> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's
> other
> >> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
> >> versioning
> >> > of
> >> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps
> >> more
> >> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should
> be.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last
> >> > year.
> >> > > No
> >> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <
> agrieve@chromium.org
> >> >
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably
> we'd
> >> > want
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update script
> >> (not
> >> > > sure
> >> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a
> split-up-the-platform-release
> >> > > > proposal,
> >> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process
> >> > though
> >> > > > now
> >> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> >> > > > > ,
> >> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it
> :)
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > NOT IT!
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> >> > > platforms.
> >> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
> >> > working
> >> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
> >> mmocny@chromium.org
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the
> platforms,
> >> > and
> >> > > > > > remove
> >> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the
> dist/
> >> > > > artifacts
> >> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have
> different
> >> > > > > > individual
> >> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping
> >> > > weekly /
> >> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave
> that
> >> > for
> >> > > > > > future
> >> > > > > > > releases.)
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.
> >>  NOT
> >> > > IT!
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > -Michal
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> >> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Since we haven't decided on whether to break out platforms, we should
probably attempt to continue with the release cadence.  How urgent is
the iOS update? Could it be a 3.4.x release on its own?

On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com> wrote:
> I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this. Would be
> happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should clear up
> for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who need to
>> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I
>> hope.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it to
>> patch
>> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
>> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
>> > CordovaLib?
>> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
>> Architecture
>> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's other
>> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
>> versioning
>> > of
>> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps
>> more
>> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should be.
>> > > >
>> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last
>> > year.
>> > > No
>> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd
>> > want
>> > > to
>> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update script
>> (not
>> > > sure
>> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release
>> > > > proposal,
>> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process
>> > though
>> > > > now
>> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
>> > > > > ,
>> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > NOT IT!
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
>> > > platforms.
>> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
>> > working
>> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
>> mmocny@chromium.org
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms,
>> > and
>> > > > > > remove
>> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/
>> > > > artifacts
>> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
>> > > > > > individual
>> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping
>> > > weekly /
>> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that
>> > for
>> > > > > > future
>> > > > > > > releases.)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.
>>  NOT
>> > > IT!
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > -Michal
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
>> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Andrew Grieve <ag...@google.com>]

I don't think I'll have time before ApacheCon to help with this. Would be
happy if it happened, but can't contribute myself. Things should clear up
for me post ApacheCon though, and I'll start getting back at things.


On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who need to
> keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I
> hope.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it to
> patch
> > other things that aren't so hard to do.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> > > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> > CordovaLib?
> > > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the
> Architecture
> > > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's other
> > > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating
> versioning
> > of
> > > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> > > >
> > > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps
> more
> > > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should be.
> > > >
> > > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last
> > year.
> > > No
> > > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd
> > want
> > > to
> > > > > have the update project settings modified via the update script
> (not
> > > sure
> > > > > if that's been handled yet).
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release
> > > > proposal,
> > > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process
> > though
> > > > now
> > > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > > > > ,
> > > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > NOT IT!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> > > platforms.
> > > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
> > working
> > > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <
> mmocny@chromium.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms,
> > and
> > > > > > remove
> > > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/
> > > > artifacts
> > > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
> > > > > > individual
> > > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping
> > > weekly /
> > > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that
> > for
> > > > > > future
> > > > > > > releases.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.
>  NOT
> > > IT!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Michal
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Should we start this now? On iOS it's painful for regular devs who need to
keep patching things. We should get it out at least before ApacheCon I hope.


On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:

> That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it to patch
> other things that aren't so hard to do.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> > Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the
> CordovaLib?
> > I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the Architecture
> > settings (although we could do that I suppose)
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> >
> > > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's other
> > > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating versioning
> of
> > > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> > >
> > > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps more
> > > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should be.
> > >
> > > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last
> year.
> > No
> > > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd
> want
> > to
> > > > have the update project settings modified via the update script (not
> > sure
> > > > if that's been handled yet).
> > > >
> > > > I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release
> > > proposal,
> > > > or else risk delaying too long.
> > > >
> > > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process
> though
> > > now
> > > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> > > >
> > > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > > > ,
> > > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > NOT IT!
> > > > >
> > > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> > platforms.
> > > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been
> working
> > > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms,
> and
> > > > > remove
> > > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/
> > > artifacts
> > > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
> > > > > individual
> > > > > > responsible for each platform.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping
> > weekly /
> > > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that
> for
> > > > > future
> > > > > > releases.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT
> > IT!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Michal
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> > stevengill97@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>]

That's all it does right now, but I always figured we could use it to patch
other things that aren't so hard to do.


On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
> Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the CordovaLib?
> I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the Architecture
> settings (although we could do that I suppose)
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>
> > I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's other
> > proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating versioning of
> > platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
> >
> > I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps more
> > often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should be.
> >
> > Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last year.
> No
> > surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd want
> to
> > > have the update project settings modified via the update script (not
> sure
> > > if that's been handled yet).
> > >
> > > I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release
> > proposal,
> > > or else risk delaying too long.
> > >
> > > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process though
> > now
> > > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> > >
> > > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > > ,
> > > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > NOT IT!
> > > >
> > > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with
> platforms.
> > > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been working
> > > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > > > >
> > > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms, and
> > > > remove
> > > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/
> > artifacts
> > > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
> > > > individual
> > > > > responsible for each platform.
> > > > >
> > > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping
> weekly /
> > > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that for
> > > > future
> > > > > releases.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT
> IT!
> > > > >
> > > > > -Michal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <
> stevengill97@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

I'm all for 3.5.0 release.
Andrew - I've always thought the update script just updates the CordovaLib?
I doubt it will actually patch the main projectfile for the Architecture
settings (although we could do that I suppose)


On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:

> I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's other
> proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating versioning of
> platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)
>
> I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps more
> often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should be.
>
> Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last year. No
> surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd want to
> > have the update project settings modified via the update script (not sure
> > if that's been handled yet).
> >
> > I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release
> proposal,
> > or else risk delaying too long.
> >
> > I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process though
> now
> > that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
> >
> > I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> > ,
> > So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > NOT IT!
> > >
> > > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with platforms.
> > >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been working
> > > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > > >
> > > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms, and
> > > remove
> > > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/
> artifacts
> > > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
> > > individual
> > > > responsible for each platform.
> > > >
> > > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping weekly /
> > > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that for
> > > future
> > > > releases.)
> > > >
> > > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT IT!
> > > >
> > > > -Michal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>]

I think the platforms separation might have to come w/ andrew's other
proposal. (Or at least more discussion about how seperating versioning of
platforms will impact cli/plugman code.)

I'm always a +1 for releasing. Ideally we exercise these new steps more
often so the whole thing becomes a total non event. As it should be.

Fun fact, we shipped 67 releases of the phonegap distribution last year. No
surprise we are not on track to match this year. (Yet.)


On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:

> The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd want to
> have the update project settings modified via the update script (not sure
> if that's been handled yet).
>
> I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release proposal,
> or else risk delaying too long.
>
> I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process though now
> that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.
>
> I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md
> ,
> So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > NOT IT!
> >
> > I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with platforms.
> >  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been working
> > on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> > >
> > > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms, and
> > remove
> > > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/ artifacts
> > > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
> > individual
> > > responsible for each platform.
> > >
> > > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping weekly /
> > > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that for
> > future
> > > releases.)
> > >
> > > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT IT!
> > >
> > > -Michal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>]

The main reason would be for iOS Xcode 5.1 support. Probably we'd want to
have the update project settings modified via the update script (not sure
if that's been handled yet).

I don't think we need to wait for a split-up-the-platform-release proposal,
or else risk delaying too long.

I do think someone needs to do a one-over of our release process though now
that we're using dist/ & votes more properly.

I've finished moving the docs from the wiki to:
https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/cadence-release-process.md,
So you can use the github editor to create pull requests to it :)



On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> NOT IT!
>
> I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with platforms.
>  I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been working
> on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > Feels like we just released 3.4!
> >
> > We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms, and
> remove
> > Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/ artifacts
> > easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different
> individual
> > responsible for each platform.
> >
> > (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping weekly /
> > independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that for
> future
> > releases.)
> >
> > Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT IT!
> >
> > -Michal
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

NOT IT!

I would hold off 3.5 before we decide what we're doing with platforms.
 I don't feel Android needs a new release yet, but I've been working
on an experimental branch for a bit, so I'm not 100% sure.



On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Feels like we just released 3.4!
>
> We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms, and remove
> Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/ artifacts
> easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different individual
> responsible for each platform.
>
> (We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping weekly /
> independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that for future
> releases.)
>
> Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT IT!
>
> -Michal
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>]

Feels like we just released 3.4!

We discussed this at the Hangout: Lets split out the platforms, and remove
Release Notes from the dist artifact, so as to make the dist/ artifacts
easier to release/test.  Also makes it easier to have different individual
responsible for each platform.

(We also discussed moving to semver and potentially shipping weekly /
independently of each other -- but I think we should leave that for future
releases.)

Finally, we also discussed starting to use release managers.  NOT IT!

-Michal


On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

For cleanup - don't forget https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-5932


On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> How are people feeling about doing a 3.5.0 release soon?
>